The telecommunications ecosystem in Spain has recently faced an unusual development: a communication from CNMC addressed to all companies registered in its Operator Registry to execute the blocking of six domains linked to illegal football broadcasts. What’s surprising is not just the scope — affecting both major national networks and small local telecoms — but the context: more than ten years have passed since the events and, according to various sector sources, many of those websites no longer operate or are not registered anymore.
The CNMC, which functions as the market regulator and oversees the electronic communications framework, does not assess the substance of the blocking in the known document. In practice, it transmits the mandate by “strict compliance” with a minute from the Provincial Court of A Coruña, and advises operators to contact the court in case of operational doubts.
Six domains on the list… and a delayed enforcement
The list of domains to be blocked includes: teledeporteonlinetv.org, teledeporteonlinetv.net, kasimirotv.net, malaga65.org, lacasadeltikitaka.org, and lasaladeportiva.es. The order relates to illicit live streams of matches from La Liga (First and Second Division) and the Copa del Rey during the 2015/16 and 2016/17 seasons, in cases where signals captured legally via satellite were redistributed online with advertising monetization.
Judicial records also note that the involved company earned around 1.7 million euros between July and December 2016 — highlighting the financial scale of the case… even though the blockages are happening when the domains seem already inactive.
Why is CNMC contacting “all” telecoms?
The key lies in the Operator Registry. In Spain, entities operating public networks or providing electronic communication services to the public must notify and register accordingly, under current legal frameworks. This database essentially functions as the operational “census” of the sector, from which broad instructions can be escalated.
The unusual aspect, according to sector reports, is that the obligation was not limited to operators above a certain threshold — as is common in other blocking orders to avoid burdening small ISPs. Instead, the mandate extends to all registered entities, regardless of size or footprint, creating technical and administrative challenges for companies that may not have dedicated compliance teams.
What does “blocking a website” in 2026 mean (and why is it complex)?
Although the judicial order mentions blocking “access” from Spanish territory, the technical reality is that there are several ways to implement that directive. Spain has precedents of coordinated blocks related to intellectual property — for example, based on administrative procedures and protocols between operators — using mechanisms such as unified notices and redirects to official informational pages.
For technical operations, what’s important is that each method has different impacts, and not all are equally feasible for smaller operators.
Table 1 — Common website blocking techniques in access networks
| Technique | Application method | Main advantage | Risks/side effects |
|---|---|---|---|
| DNS Blocking | Resolve domain to NXDOMAIN or a “sinkhole” IP | Easy to deploy on own resolvers | Can be bypassed using external DNS; user confusion possible |
| IP Blocking | Filter routes/ACLs to a specific IP | Effective if service is tied to that IP | High risk of blocking legitimate services if shared hosting/CDN used |
| HTTP(S) Host/SNI Blocking | Filter by hostname (when feasible) | More granular than IP blocking | Challenging with modern encryption and evolving protocols like ECH; requires specialized equipment and fine policies |
| Redirection to Informational Page | Intercept and redirect to notice | Transparency to users | Implementation varies; may disrupt flows and cause false positives |
Many large operators already have filtering pipelines and external suppliers to handle recurring orders. However, a small local telecom may operate with lighter architectures or outsource parts of the core, making the process more complex. Even if the domain list is short, the actual cost lies in procedures, audits, support, and testing, not just adding six entries to a list.
A mass order with questionable efficacy… and awkward questions
The most controversial aspect is the practical effectiveness: if the domains are inactive or unregistered, the blocking can become a mere formal act, with little real impact on current piracy. Yet, it still adds operational load, especially when the order targets the entire registry, expanding beyond the usual scope.
The sector is left with open questions: Is the CNMC being used as a “distribution channel” because it’s the only entity capable of reaching all registered operators reliably? What happens if a micro-operator lacks filtering tools or cannot guarantee a specific method? How is compliance verified when the domain no longer responds?
Meanwhile, the legal proceedings involving Rojadirecta and the cases in A Coruña continue to generate headlines and fuel debates on piracy, technical measures, and proportionality.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is CNMC and what role does it play in website blocking?
CNMC is the market and competition regulator, and maintains the Telecommunications Operator Registry. In this context, its known role is to relay judicial orders to all registrants, based on the official register.
How do operators typically block a website in Spain?
There is no single technique: methods range from DNS or IP blocks to more granular measures, and some procedures include notifying users through unified alerts and providing official information when property rights enforcement is involved.
Why block domains that are no longer active?
Because the order addresses a court sentence or official document aimed at preventing access from Spain to domains linked to verified or investigated issues, even if they are no longer practically useful today.
Does it affect large telecoms the same way as small local operators?
The mandate may be identical, but the operational impact often differs: big providers typically have dedicated systems and compliance teams, whereas small operators may need external support to implement filters and demonstrate compliance.
via: bandaancha.eu and Telefónos.